Too be honest, it's hard to tell. The grey guy has better strokes the the blue guy for sure however both players look extremely rushed. The ball isn't slowing up on the bounce worth crap so it tells me either they are hitting extremely flat or the court is uber fast and needs to be resurfaced.

Remember trying to play tennis on a slick gym floor, that's what that video reminds me off. Both have particularly weak banhkhands.

I'm being generous here. They are in Europe so clearly they've not played USTA events which means they don't have a ranking but let's imagine that London has some sort of tennis association, I'll say 2.5. I was too generous before.

They haven't spent counless amount of blood, sweat, and tears playing in the USTA to deserve anything hire than provisional 21.0, yeah, I went lower the more I think about it.

No higher than 4.5 (US). Way too many wildly unforced errors to be any higher than that. They lack the patience and discipline to develop the point and the skill to recognize a true opportunity ball. The kids that I watched last weekend at a USTA nationals tourney could easily beat them. The strokes certainly look impressive on the surface (oh, look how hard they hit!) but they're just not consistent enough to be higher than 4.5 (there goes another easy shot long or into the net).

Click to expand...

Spot on assessment. Zero consistency. Good strokes in spurts. At best 4.5 but I don't know many 4.5s that make that many errors. Who sees 5.0 or 5.5 and why ? No way no chance at least not the 5.0s and plus I play. Those guys wouldn't win one game against the 5.0s I know.

Lots of vids of AndyMurray 4 years ago looking that inconsistent, and quite a few other 6.0's looking really scattered and weak, but then we find out they're better than that PARTICULAR vid shows.
Gotta give them the benefit of the doubt. They can hit 5.0 level shots at times, look somewhat balanced, and yes, impatient.
Not all 4.5's can hit 40 ball rallies, run like the wind, and move the ball side to side...nor all 5.5's.
A vid is a moment in time. It doesn't accurately represent the true skill level of the players.

Neither looks at all explosive, their movement is sluggish, their serves are weak, they're inconsistent, they make bad errors (think I saw two netted smashes), the technique looks more to be 'arming' the ball rather than using the kinetic chain (esp. the blue guy). Racket head speed also looks very slow.

well i dont know a lot about NTRP ratings because im from europe, but i watched some videos on Youtube of 4.5 Players and they were all much worse than those in the video of this thread.
So these Players here got to be better than 4.5 obviously....
if they are 5 or whatever i cannot say.

Neither looks at all explosive, their movement is sluggish, their serves are weak, they're inconsistent, they make bad errors (think I saw two netted smashes), the technique looks more to be 'arming' the ball rather than using the kinetic chain (esp. the blue guy). Racket head speed also looks very slow.

Click to expand...

That's just ridiculous, sorry. To consider them 4.0s is also unrealistic. Strong 4.5s or low 5.0s sounds about right. Definitely too many unforced errors and technical flaws to be 5.5.

That's just ridiculous, sorry. To consider them 4.0s is also unrealistic. Strong 4.5s or low 5.0s sounds about right. Definitely too many unforced errors and technical flaws to be 5.5.

Click to expand...

Your own assessment is ridiculous actually. Like many guys here you just threw out numbers without any explanation. On other hand Crosscourt gave explanation, good or not.

Id agree with crosscourt. They don't hit much differently than the guys at the court I play, 3.5-4.0, lots of powerful wacking and gross errors on 2nd or 3rd ball. If you don't agree, tell me how differently these guys hit?

I'd played a few doubles with a strong 4.5. This guy could routinely keep a very tight rally using topspin and low, skidding slice. He didn't give any unexplainable, grossly miss-hit shot.

I believe their level of play has already been confirmed on page 3.
They both had winning records at would be considered a 4.5 level of play here. But, feel free to say that they look no better than your local 3.5's. Funny, because I don't see 3.5's at any parks near me hitting the ball as well as these guys, and they don't move nearly as well, either. These guys regularly perform a split step, and they move quickly towards the next shot. Yes, they do make several unforced errors during this match, but I also witnessed some very good shot making at times that would be well beyond a 3.5 and even the vast majority of 4.0 players.

4.5 players are at the beginning of advanced level of play. A lot of people on these boards grossly exaggerate just how good 4.5 level of play is, and what it takes to get there.

Agreeing with most here, 4.5 and a 5.0. I don't think the majority of posters on here understand that you don't need to absolutely crush the ball into the corners to be a 5.0. You really need to be able to play at the 4.5 level with something extra that your opponent doesn't have. That's what you see in this video.

Spot on assessment. Zero consistency. Good strokes in spurts. At best 4.5 but I don't know many 4.5s that make that many errors. Who sees 5.0 or 5.5 and why ? No way no chance at least not the 5.0s and plus I play. Those guys wouldn't win one game against the 5.0s I know.

Your own assessment is ridiculous actually. Like many guys here you just threw out numbers without any explanation. On other hand Crosscourt gave explanation, good or not.

Id agree with crosscourt. They don't hit much differently than the guys at the court I play, 3.5-4.0, lots of powerful wacking and gross errors on 2nd or 3rd ball. If you don't agree, tell me how differently these guys hit?

I'd played a few doubles with a strong 4.5. This guy could routinely keep a very tight rally using topspin and low, skidding slice. He didn't give any unexplainable, grossly miss-hit shot.

Click to expand...

As LeeD said, even guys that are 6.0 can be surprisingly inconsistent when hitting with a lot of pace. These two guys hit with good pace and have decent movement and defensive skills (especially the guy in grey). A 3.5 or 4.0 would simply not be able to withstand their pace. On the other hand, their serve is unimpressive, they have relatively weak backhands, and they're clearly overaggressive. Still, IMO these flaws don't make them below the 4.5 level. 3.5s simply can't hit with this pace with any kind of control, and 4.0s don't look that solid overall.